yes, but what is "too deep"? Does that mean going beyond the scope of the CCNA Wireless, which we have done countless times, or is it comparing experience to theory? It may be that even the CCNP Wireless may show some things that are contrary to real world experience. I don't know, I haven't gotten that far. Knowing a CCNP level for an Associate test is fine, I think its the experience that sometimes may hang you up.

In any vendor based cert, you always gotta remember to answer the way the vendor wants you to.

I don't think we can tell a priori whether the CCNP-Wireless will be more or less current than the CCNA-Wireless. They have their separate exam and exam prep doc update cycles; we'd need to know those before we could predict.

However, I have the impression that the software versions tend to update faster than the hardware versions; I'd expect what gets learned on boards like this one that go "too deep" relative to the exam for which we're preparing to have the most "problems" where we're talking about software-specific matters, rather than where we're talking about protocols or hardware. I notice, for instance, that the exam cert guide talks extensively about the draft 802.11n, yet that was ratified a whole year ago. We're not confused by that.

There are more good points brought up and learned/cleared up in areas where we have gone "to deep"; personally I think that Cisco Press should have an online forum like this or CLN should host it. When you purchase the book/PDF you get access and it can contain updates and corrections as they are discovered. That would be using the power of the network to truly stay connected while at the same time providing a higher quality of learning for the support of product lines and technology.

Stop looking at the bottom line and look at delivering a better product, more will come to you for it. (New business/Learning model)

That's .25¢ there,

JCB

* and there needs to be a Wiremagnet now too... or Cisco could just buy them.

I think we should start our own company Wiremagnet, Or I might just get it as a domain name.

Anyways as for going too deep I dont really feel thats possible in your study, in the first instance you are studying only to pass an exam. I worked with a network guy who didnt have a CCNA once and I had just passed mine, but he hhad 20 years experience in IT and 10 in networking so he was better. Now if we troubleshoot do we turn around and say that wasnt in the book so I dont know, no we try and solve the issue, if we weren't inquisitive non of us would be here and there are bits that Eric will dive into that I will igneore and bits that Jared will understand that I don't etc thats what makes us differentand tis exciting.

I think H-REAP groups has changed aswell or is a new feature as I used it the other day.

There are lots of new features with the new codes that are really coming out fast and if we say sit the exams in 12 months they are out of date code wise to what we will be deploying. I think the wireless code lifecycle is the quickest of all prodicts, or shortest.

Now 802.11n is 6 months old, it was ratified September 11th 2009 exactly 7 years after the IEEE 802.11n working group was formed and the same day that 802.3at was ratified as a standard.

If we think of the cert guides as products then we could expect them to be better than they are as training materials, however Cisco Press is no doubt responsible for its own profit and I dont see accuracy delaying publication. I won't judge the technocal editors but I got a new book today asking about 802.1n rather than 802.11n and its been out for a year, Cisco itself has the same with all the caveats in the release notes. I have deployed code 3.2 and believe me its alot better now than it was then. Just getting the WLC up was a challenge back in the day I've also killed controllers with non Cisco SFPs which shouldnt happen, its nice having to foot £10k because the client wanted to save a few ££££s on SFPs and you right a controller off. Ive also installed an HP chassis that didnt actually do layer 3 properly so the client had to install a Cisco layere 3 switch just to do VLAN routing. So I cant see a time when we can go to deep as reading the release notes may say it doesnt work like that or understanding the EAP encapsulation and setup to Windows IAS which is what you need in the field against the questions Cisco (or any vendor) asks in the exam. Train to pass the exam and fail in te field or use it as a stepping stone to enhance your understanding and be a better engineer.

Where I work the guys with the Wireless Field and Design exams can do neither but they are qualified I am not so I know wireless they know R&S its the way of the world, just another tick in the box, in an interview its your knowledge that will be tested, the cert might help you get there but if you dont know what your talking about then you will be found out.

Wiremagnet™ is for the engineers that go deep. I like the rambling, I feel more at home. To be honest though, you can not look to cover it for the scope of the exam as it is just a guide, not a complete encompassing tomb of all the needed information. I have been reviewing training companies too for who I am going to use to ready up for my CCIE. Within the next 30 months I will have at least one CCIE under by belt.

1. For folks that are relatively inexperienced, whether or not they hold a cert (I'll call 2-3 years inexperienced, just to concrete-ize the matter), I suggest that it's hard to discriminate new capabilities in the SW/HW update from the not yet seen capabilities in the existing SW/HW. Short update cycles exacerbate this, but I'm not sure they (or any update cycle) create the problem.

2. I think a publisher should delay publication in the interests of accuracy. To delay for currency's sake? Probably not--get it on out the door. It's still a useful pub, IFF it's accurate.

3. Even with old, hoary, mature SW/HW, new stuff will be found, errors found, things that were well-tested and thought to be right no longer are right. We had a case (lots of long-shot coincidences in this story) at my last company (which is the world's aircraft simulator manufacturer) where we were building simulators for a mature, but sdtill current USAF fighter, and we found a braking problem. Under certain circumstances, the brakes would fail shortly after touchdown, and the pilot would either have to go around or snag a wire--if the wire was available. We told the USAF of this because the user's manual on this fighter did not address the problem. USAF's response first was, "That won't happen." We showed them in their aircraft operating system code where/how it could happen. Then they said, "That'sunlikely to happen." In truth, they weren't far wrong; this aircraft is very old as fighters go, and the problem had not occurred in any recognizable manner--other brakiing problems, but not this one. Within a month after this last response, one of our simulator test pilots, who also was an ANG pilot in this aircraft, had exactly this problem while landing at the end of a mission. He told the USAF that if he hadn't encountered this problem in the sim, he'd have had no idea what to do about it. The USAF updated their user's manual immediately. This sort of thing happens everywhere. It's why we always (:-^) ) spend that extra hour documenting what we found when we install/maintain/troubleshoot....

4. Go too deep in our studies? Nah. That's too hard to do. What's our purpose in the study? If it's to pass a cert exam, we still benefit from going beyond the bare minimum--that's how we learn enough to figure out an answer we wouldn't otherwise know. To get better at our work? Knowledge is even more important. Knowledge and experience both are critically important to doing well.

5. I think discussions like this thread, and the others we've had in this study group, could very well fill the bill on getting corrections/updates/unclarities back to Cisco and into the docs they publish/allow CiscoPress to publish in their name. All we need is for Cisco folks to pay attention and carry the word back, which we'd need them to do were the other ideas along this line implemented. This is no knock on EricN; he's done a very good job here. But all he can do is carry the word. Cisco higher ups have to take the action.

My oldest daughter has advised me that she want to complete her CCNA over the summer. She's not even in 5th grade yet (but an honor student, reads a lot)... WOW amazing, she likes wireless as well and I am sure by this time next year she will most likely be reading all of our posts. Back to the PDF's and RFCs...

I did a recce today on the exam centre, looks ok and not too far away. I will book my exam tomorrow to sit it Monday 19th, the first available time in the morning is at 09.30 hours which is 14.30 hours UK time.

Cisco made 2 cards for laptops with a pcmcia form factor, the 350 card and the cb21ag. The 350 only does b if I recall, I have a few in my bag and a couple of cb21ag cards aswell. Only one of my cb21ag cards works and is held together with tape.

So its the CB21AG or the 350 PC cardbus type, you will need the card aswell as it is onky a suplicant for the Cisco adapters.